From: utzoo!decvax!yale-com!donath
Newsgroups: net.singles
Title: Re: Virginity
Article-I.D.: yale-com.1398
Posted: Sat Apr 23 14:52:07 1983
Received: Sun Apr 24 07:42:09 1983
References: brunix.2453

What made me curious about Lady Arwen's letter was that she said that
her interpretation of 'sex' or 'intercourse' (I forget which) was quite
broad.  It reminds me of the high-school category of 'technical virgins'
who had done anything and everything that one could do, without having
actual intercourse.  It made perfectly good sense years ago when birth
control was difficult to obtain - technical virgins were usually tht
way for practical reasons rather than moral ones.  Now that birth control
is easy to find, is there any reason for this type of so-close-and-yet-so-far
virginity?  (I am not saying that virginity per se (or celibacy) is bad
or silly, but that the distinction between certain sexual acts seems a bit
arbitrary)

				Judith (yale-comix)